Noise suppressors for firearms are well known in the prior art, and many have been patented over a considerable period of time. Many different techniques have been developed and patented, and flash suppressors and baffles of varying designs have been extensively used. The aim and intention of a noise suppressor, regardless of the technique used, is to reduce the pressure and velocity of the propellant gases from the sound suppressor so that the resulting sound level is significantly reduced.
Prior art noise suppressors include flash suppressor systems and internal baffles for reducing the muzzle flash of a firearm when it has been discharged. Previous flash suppressor designs provide a combination of features which culminated in systems for reducing the muzzle flash of a firearm to various degrees. B.E. Meyers' four tine design, U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,837,139 and 7,302,774 (Myers), Smith Enterprises' Vortex flash suppressor, U.S. Pat. No. 5,596,161 (Sommers), and Advanced Armament Corp.'s flash suppressor, U.S. Pat. No. 7,905,170 (Brittingham), are currently available in the market place. The aforementioned designs fail to provide several needed features necessary and desirable for today's firearms. Most particularly, and as exemplified by Advanced Armament Corp.'s flash suppressor, the design of the respective tines of the flash suppressor results in an undesirable “ringing” tone to be emitted from the flash suppressor upon the discharge of the firearm due to imparted harmonics on the respective tines of the firearm.
Quite complex baffle structures are known in the prior art. Some of these baffles have more recently used asymmetric features, such as slanted sidewalls or baffles that have been positioned at an angle to the bore, to achieve high levels of sound reduction. U.S. Pat. No. 4,588,043 (Finn) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,164,535 (Leasure) are indicative of the complex baffles using slanted sidewalls or asymmetric cuts into the bore of the baffles. Known prior art as practiced also includes baffles known as “K” baffles, where the baffle consists of a flat flange joined to a conical section by a web. An inner chamber was formed between the front face of the flat flange and the rear face of the conical section. The “K” baffle first appeared during the mid-1980s, and while initially symmetrical venting or porting was used to vent gases into the inner chamber between the rear and front faces of the baffle, slanted sidewalls were used to improve the performance of the “K” baffle, as well as asymmetric cuts or scoops on the rear face and on the conical front face, with the scoop on the front face penetrating through the conical front face and into the inner chamber. This had the effect of venting gases into the inner chamber, which enhanced the sound reduction of the suppressor. These asymmetric cuts or scoops are similar to the slanted sidewall feature of the Finn patent in that the cuts or scoops are positioned 180 degrees apart. However, while such a modified “K” baffle worked well with pistol caliber firearms, the asymmetry caused some detrimental effect on accuracy when used with rifle caliber firearms, and required an increase in the size of the bore aperture of the baffle to ensure minimization of bullet yaw. This would otherwise result in projectiles striking the baffles and the end cap of the suppressor. What is required is a baffle that offers high levels of sound reduction, minimizes bullet yaw and enhances and/or maintains the normal accuracy of the host firearm.
Accordingly, there is a need for a noise suppressor for a firearm using flash suppressors and baffles that have little or no detrimental effect on the accuracy of the fired projectile, and produce high levels of sound and flash reduction. This is achieved through the use of a flash suppressor and downstream baffles whose design provides enhanced performance over the prior art systems.
Further, various systems are known in the firearms art for attaching a noise suppressor to a firearm, and specifically for removably attaching a noise suppressor to a flash suppressor affixed to the muzzle end of a firearm. There nevertheless exists a need for improving such systems, particularly for increasing the ease by which a user may attach a noise suppressor to a flash suppressor while at the same time affecting a reliable securement therebetween capable of withstanding vibrations incidental to the firing of such firearms as automatic rifles used by military personnel.